OpenAI launched a new public salvo against The New York Times on Wednesday, accusing it of trying to invade its users’ privacy by demanding 20 million ChatGPT logs.
What the company didn’t mention is that it already lost that battle in court.
On Wednesday, OpenAI published a statement authored by its chief information security officer, Dane Stuckey, titled “Fighting the New York Times’ invasion of user privacy.”
Stuckey wrote that the publication’s demand for users’ ChatGPT logs, which it asked to review as part of its copyright infringement lawsuit, “disregards long-standing privacy protections” and “breaks with common-sense security practices.”
“Journalism has historically played a critical role in defending people’s right to privacy throughout the world,” Stuckey wrote. “However, this demand from the New York Times does not live up to that legacy, and we’re asking the court to reject it.”
Left unmentioned in the public statement is that a federal judge has already ruled against OpenAI on the issue.
In a November 7 order, Magistrate Judge Ona Wang wrote that it was “appropriate” for OpenAI to produce the 20 million ChatGPT logs that lawyers for The New York Times had requested as part of their discovery process.
She said that OpenAI hadn’t adequately explained why the privacy of ChatGPT users was not already protected, given the stringent measures required for lawyers and experts to review the discovery material in the case.
“OpenAI has failed to explain how its consumers’ privacy rights are not adequately protected by: (1) the existing protective order in this multidistrict litigation or (2) OpenAI’s exhaustive de-identification of all of the 20 million Consumer ChatGPT Logs,” Wong wrote.
The New York Times sued OpenAI and Microsoft in 2023 in Manhattan federal court. The publication said the tech companies infringed on its copyright by using its news articles for training data, effectively replicating its reporting in response to ChatGPT queries.
In court filings, The New York Times said it wants to analyze a sample of ChatGPT’s logs — amounting to 20 million user logs — to understand how its users have used the chatbot over time.
As Business Insider previously reported, lawyers involved in the lawsuit are already required to take extreme precautions to protect OpenAI’s secrets.
Attorneys for The New York Times were required to review ChatGPT’s source code on a computer unconnected to the internet, in a room where they were forbidden from bringing their own electronic devices, and guarded by security that only allowed them in with a government-issued ID. OpenAI has also already committed to a “de-identification” process that would scrub chats of sensitive user data.
In a court filing on Wednesday, lawyers for OpenAI asked Wang to reconsider her ruling, arguing that “neither common sense nor the Federal Rules justify the forced production of a massive trove of irrelevant personal user conversations.” The company said it hadn’t been given adequate opportunity to explain why Wang considered the wrong legal precedents in justifying her decision.
The New York Times is one of a handful of news publications suing OpenAI and Microsoft. The lawsuit is one of the farthest-along and widest-ranging copyright lawsuits against artificial intelligence companies.
Axel Springer, which owns Business Insider, has a content licensing deal with OpenAI.
Stuckey’s Wednesday statement isn’t the first time OpenAI has publicly criticized The New York Times for asking the court’s permission to review ChatGPT user logs.
In June, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman pressed New York Times reporter Kevin Roose about his opinion on the dispute during an interview on Roose’s podcast.
“Are you going to talk about where you sue us because you don’t like user privacy?” Altman asked.
Representatives for The New York Times, OpenAI, and Microsoft didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.
